Hi and thanks for visiting the best Ravens forum on the planet. You do not have to be a member to browse the various forums, but in order to post and interact with your purple brethren, you will have to **register**. It only takes a couple of minutes. You can also use your Facebook account to log in....just click on the blue 'FConnect' link at the very top of the page.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

The secondary didn't play well, but Vick FEASTED on the middle of the field. And that falls on our LB's. They were horrible in pass coverage today.

The secondary was fine, The WRs numbers were not major at all. It was the LBs who stayed in to "spy" on vick left the middle of the field open to the TE. THe CBs actually played well. The only long pass to Jackson was good coverage but just a perfect pass and there is no defense for a perfect pass.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by Ravenous1

I do not see the secondary as the major issue. There was the blown coverage on the Macklin TD...that happens.

The biggest issue is yea they hit Vick many times but it was not till 5,6,7,8 seconds after the snap. You give any QB that time they will pick you apart. Give Vick that type of time he will shred you. You cannot expect any DB to cover that long.

I agree, the Ravens often did not rush Vick and mean not even try and just want to contain him and that is when they were burned. When we actually rushed him we were very successful. That is how you beat Vick not by just having 3 players eat up space and try to contain. when you give ANY QB 5-7 seconds to throw a WR will break from the coverage when the QB is moving and will make a play. Its not the pass rush, its not the secondary, it was the coaches today.

The secondary was fine, The WRs numbers were not major at all. It was the LBs who stayed in to "spy" on vick left the middle of the field open to the TE. THe CBs actually played well. The only long pass to Jackson was good coverage but just a perfect pass and there is no defense for a perfect pass.

If by CB's playing well means Webb but not Smith or Williams. But how you allow a tight end like Celek to be that wide open multiple times a game is ridiculous.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

If by CB's playing well means Webb but not Smith or Williams. But how you allow a tight end like Celek to be that wide open multiple times a game is ridiculous.

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2

Smith played well had that great coverage on Jacksons catch it was just a perfect throw and also defended him on the sideline on a 3rd down. Williams had one bad play on the misscomunication. The TE is the LBs problem and they were busy watching Vick run around the back field while Celek was getting open

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

I don't know, guys. How can you complain about a defensive effort that netted FOUR turnovers? Sure, they gave up a lot of yards, but they also got off the field and handed the ball to the offense four times! The offense did almost nothing with the opportunities the defense handed them.

If the offense could have stayed on the field, the defense gives up a lot fewer yards. But they couldn't. Philly beat us in TOP by almost 10 minutes despite coughing up the ball four times.

This game is down to the offense failing IMO. The defense could not have done a lot more. Only giving up 24 points when you give up ~500 yards is not bad scoring defense. Look how many yards a few other offenses got today, then look at the amount of points they put up.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

It's not just linebackers. If a TE is eating up a team they usually adjust which means at least some safety help. Celek was wide open the whole game. It's like no one was covering him.

The people who were supposed to were watching Vick when they should have been covering Celek. It takes 1 player to spy on vick not 3 they could have had 2 LBs on Celek or been more effective by rushing him like they did early and it was working.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by Benny8444

The people who were supposed to were watching Vick when they should have been covering Celek. It takes 1 player to spy on vick not 3 they could have had 2 LBs on Celek or been more effective by rushing him like they did early and it was working.

A spy is an assigned role. It's not decided by the players on the field. Tough to tell whose job it was from TV but it would probably be Ellerbe. That would leave Ray on the TE but he clearly wasn't there so there was some coverage plan that wasn't working and never adjusted.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Philly's D made ours look like really bad. Their coverage was awsome even though the refs made them look better, and the front seven got enough pressure on flacco to make him uncomfortable for most of the game.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by redmike34

I don't know, guys. How can you complain about a defensive effort that netted FOUR turnovers? Sure, they gave up a lot of yards, but they also got off the field and handed the ball to the offense four times! The offense did almost nothing with the opportunities the defense handed them.

If the offense could have stayed on the field, the defense gives up a lot fewer yards. But they couldn't. Philly beat us in TOP by almost 10 minutes despite coughing up the ball four times.

This game is down to the offense failing IMO. The defense could not have done a lot more. Only giving up 24 points when you give up ~500 yards is not bad scoring defense. Look how many yards a few other offenses got today, then look at the amount of points they put up.

You keep talking about the turnovers as if they're a sign of a consistently excellent defense. They are not. Turnovers are essentially random. When a receiver tips a ball up into the air and a defender comes down with it, that's luck. Yes--you have to be in the right place at the right time. But there's no guarantee that you bring that pass in.

The same is true of a fumble in the field of play--it's essentially random who comes up with it.

Our defense will not be able to collect tipped balls every time they need to be bailed out of giving up 80 yard drives. Just think about it. You're NOT concerned that the Eagles receivers ran wild at will against our secondary? Watching Vick complete pass after pass to uncovered receivers is very, very worrying to me.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by bmorecareful

You keep talking about the turnovers as if they're a sign of a consistently excellent defense. They are not. Turnovers are essentially random. When a receiver tips a ball up into the air and a defender comes down with it, that's luck. Yes--you have to be in the right place at the right time. But there's no guarantee that you bring that pass in.

The same is true of a fumble in the field of play--it's essentially random who comes up with it.

Our defense will not be able to collect tipped balls every time they need to be bailed out of giving up 80 yard drives. Just think about it. You're NOT concerned that the Eagles receivers ran wild at will against our secondary? Watching Vick complete pass after pass to uncovered receivers is very, very worrying to me.

I don't think it's relevant whether they're random or not. I do think that getting turnovers and not taking advantage of getting them is an offensive problem, not a defensive problem.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

I think a big problem that i touched on all offseason and it was blown off by posters here was the lack of a nickel LB, especially if BA is not gonna be in that role. Celek is a good player but the day he had was just ridiculous. Hopefully its addressed soon, i was on the road so i didnt see the game but it sounds like the run defense was pretty good. Heard the pass rush was still anemic and besides that nothing else really alarming but Celek's numbers just pop off the box score.

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by Carey

I think a big problem that i touched on all offseason and it was blown off by posters here was the lack of a nickel LB, especially if BA is not gonna be in that role. Celek is a good player but the day he had was just ridiculous. Hopefully its addressed soon, i was on the road so i didnt see the game but it sounds like the run defense was pretty good. Heard the pass rush was still anemic and besides that nothing else really alarming but Celek's numbers just pop off the box score.

This is something I don't understand. The Ravens had the best 3rd down defense in the NFL last year and you are going to take your Nickel LB out of his role??? It's one of the bigger head scratchers for me in the Pagano - Pees transition

Re: 486 Yards of Offense

Originally Posted by LC_Ravens_87

This is something I don't understand. The Ravens had the best 3rd down defense in the NFL last year and you are going to take your Nickel LB out of his role??? It's one of the bigger head scratchers for me in the Pagano - Pees transition

I dont get it either, go down the list of our LB's and they are all pretty horrible covering in space, Ray looks better since he's dropped weight but besides that we have nothing besides BA.